GEMA-/ GVL- Remuneration for the use of music in dance schools

The u.a. for the Copyright responsible I. Civil Senate of the Bundesgerichtshof had to deal with in three methods set by the Higher Regional Court of Munich general agreements on remuneration for the use of music in dance classes and ballet lessons.

The three defendants are associations, whose members include many dance schools and ballet schools. These give in dance classes or ballet lessons on recordings-recorded music. But they have both the society for musical performing- and reproduction rights (GEMA) as well as to the applicant, the Society for the exploitation of performing rights (GVL), each to pay any money. GEMA receives compensation for the use of copyright to the view of their composers and lyricists. The applicant claimed compensation for the use of the exercise of its proprietary performance rights of performers and phonogram producers. Between the plaintiff and the defendant were general agreements, according to which the defendant for the reproduction of sound recordings an allowance equal to a premium of 20% had to pay to the relevant collective GEMA. After receiving the GEMA 5/6 and the applicant 1/6 the total to be paid by the defendants for the use of music remuneration.

The applicant has applied for judicial setting new general agreements at the Higher Regional Court of Munich. It considers, agreed in the contract to date total 20% surcharge on the GEMA tariff should be increased to a 100%-owned surcharge, because the performance of the related rights and the author were of equal.

The Higher Regional Court of Munich, the total contracts due to the Copyright Administration Act after “reasonable discretion” shall fix, has increased the remuneration in the new general agreements between the plaintiff and the defendant and provided a 30% surcharge on the GEMA tariff.

In contrast, the applicant and in two methods, the defendants have, who want to stick to the 20% surcharge, inserted allowed by the Court of Appeal to the Bundesgerichtshof.

The Federal Court of charges set by the Higher Regional Court of total contracts not approved in all respects and therefore remanded the matters to the new hearing and decision the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal was allowed in the question of the appropriateness of the award even in the cases in the previous, orient decades practiced allowances. It has but established unconvincing, why an allowance equal to a 30% surcharge corresponds to the GEMA rate of equity. In particular, it gave rise to the increase in the remuneration with a growing importance in the last decades of performers for public performances of musical works, although it will be understood, that this circumstance does not significantly impact upon the ordinary use of music in dance schools, because the performer of the song here is no emphasis on. In addition, the Court of Appeal has on false reasoning, the remuneration arrangements for performers and phonogram producers on the one hand and the music copyright on the other hand in the field of cable retransmission, not include private copying and the radio in the assessment.

Judgments 18. June 2014 – I ZR 214/12, I ZR 215/12 and I ZR 220/12

OLG – Judgments 27. September 2012 – 6 Sch 13/10 WG, 6 Sch 14/10 WG und 6 Sch 15/10 WG,

Please rate

For more information: